Loading video...

Video Failed to Load

Go Home

California State University Professor Melina Abdullah invited her students during class to sign a petition urging Gavin Newsom to veto a bill aimed at preventing antisemitism in K-12 schools. The university is investigating. According to the faculty handbook, “the law…prohibits the use of state time and resources (including state...

71,562 views • 8 months ago •via X (Twitter)

0 Comments

No comments available

Comments from the original post will appear here

Related Videos

The Singaporean has been arrested after he being defrauded? Why is the NDC Regional Chairman Ashie Moore still free? I know this turn of event follows For The Records exposé on this issue Let’s revisit what the law says from the Political Party Act 2000 (Act 574) PART III-FUNDING OF POLITICAL PARTIES Section 23: Contribution by Citizens. Only a citizen may contribute in cash or in kind to the funds of a political party. A firm, partnership, or enterprise owned by a citizen or a company registered under the laws of the Republic at least seventy-five percent of whose capital is owned by a citizen is for the purposes of this Act a citizen. Section 24: No Contribution by Non-Citizens. A non-citizen shall not directly or indirectly make a contribution or donation or loan whether in cash or in kind to the funds held by or for the benefit of a political party and no political party or person acting for or on behalf of a political party shall demand or accept a contribution donation or loan from a non-citizen. Section 25: Contraventions of this Part. Where any person contravenes section 23 or 24, in addition to any penalty that may be imposed under this Act, any amount whether in cash or in kind paid in contravention of the section shall be forfeited to the State and the amount shall be recovered from the political party as debt owed to the State. The political party or person in whose custody the amount is for the time being held shall pay it to the State. A non-citizen found guilty of contravention of section 24 shall be deemed to be a prohibited immigrant and liable to deportation under the Aliens Act, 1963 (Act 160). The provisions of sections 23 and 24 do not preclude a goverment of any country or a nongovernmental organization from providing assistance in cash or in kind to the Commission for use by the Commission for the collective benefit of registered political parties. The law is clear on this and we expect the NDC Chairman to refund the money sponsored by Toh You Kang into their campaign to the state. Total Abuse of Power! Scam Aban!

For The Records

58,832 views • 1 year ago

NEW: Hawaii Bill HB2079 Legalizes Kidnapping Children Across State Lines Directly From Hawaii Free Press “HB2079 Would Legalize Child Kidnapping for Sex Change” The Bill “Also forbids the entire state of Hawaii, including the governor, from disclosing records or extraditing any kidnapper charged in another state so long as the kidnapper alleges that the purpose of taking the child was to provide access to gender affirming care” Bill HB2079 “Forbids the courts from returning any child kidnapped from their home state. What in It gives them legal jurisdiction over your child.” “It also makes it a crime to interfere with the kidnappers or to disclose any data about the gender affirming care with anyone other than the kidnap kidnap kidnapper petitioner even if it's ordered by another court. And it would also become a crime under state law to comply with any oversight or investigation into the kidnappings from” More details on the Bill from Hawaii Free Press: “The Hawaii Kidnapping Bill's unique and unmistakable true intent is to allow legal protections for any non-parent with sufficient access and means to remove a child of any age from their home state, and to bring them to Hawaii in the name of receiving “Gender Affirming Care” – so long as they could not receive said ‘care’ in their home state. The many sections of Hawaii Revised Statutes affected by the Hawaii Kidnapping Bill are designed to trigger a series of child-custody 'loopholes' that cause inter-state barriers to be systematically removed, so long as the instigator says the magic words: “Gender Affirming Care.” “The bill's proposed amendments to the UCCJEA redefine a family-court emergency, to allow any person “acting as a parent” to obtain emergency temporary custody against natural parents who decline to provide their children so-called “Gender Affirming Care.” Natural parents’ refusal to provide sex-change procedures would be treated as being of the same legal weight and severity as actual physical abuse or child abandonment. The bill reads: §583A-204, Hawaii Revised Statutes, is amended by amending subsection (a) to read as follows: (a) A court of this State [has] shall have temporary emergency jurisdiction if the child is present in this State and the child has been abandoned or it is necessary in an emergency to protect the child because [the]: (1) The child, or a sibling or parent of the child, is subjected to or threatened with mistreatment or abuse[.]; or (2) The child has been unable to obtain gender‑affirming health care services. This language plainly redefines a custody “emergency” to mean “unable to obtain gender‑affirming health care services.”

Wall Street Apes

269,970 views • 2 years ago